Effective Evaluation of Teaching: A Guide for Faculty and Administrators

ISBN: 978-1-941804-24-7

Download PDF (0.9 Mb)

Table of Contents

Conducting Research on Student Evaluations of TeachingWilliam E. Addison & Jeffrey R. Stowell, Eastern Illinois University
The long and productive history of research on student evaluations of teaching (SETs) can be traced to the early 1920s. Following a summary of this history, we examine the methodologies and findings in four broad areas of research: reliability studies; validity studies; factor analyses; and investigations involving course, instructor, and student variables that have been examined for their possible influence on SETs. Additionally, we discuss methodological concerns and ethical issues associated with research in this area, and briefly describe several directions for future research.

Choosing an Instrument for Student Evaluation of InstructionJared W. Keeley, Mississippi State University
Student evaluations of instruction (SEIs) have become ubiquitous in the college classroom. The purpose of this chapter is to aid individuals in selecting an SEI to meet their particular evaluative goals. To do so, the chapter will review various considerations regarding the reliability, validity, and factor structure of SEIs and provide examples of publically available and for-pay instruments.

Formative Teaching Evaluations: Is Student Input Useful?Janie H. Wilson and Rebecca G. Ryan, Georgia Southern University
Student evaluations of teaching offer valuable information to teachers who want to improve their teaching. Specifically, formative student evaluations collected prior to the end of a course allow teachers to adjust teaching practices and potentially enhance learning. In this chapter, we discuss several characteristics of teaching evaluations, including content, timing, format, and ways to utilize evaluations effectively.

Using Student Feedback as One Measure of Faculty Teaching EffectivenessMaureen A. McCarthy, Kennesaw State University
Determining how to use Student Evaluations of Teaching (SETs) as a measure of teaching effectiveness has been a challenge for faculty and administrators alike. Quantitative measures, interpreted in isolation, provide succinct data that have the greatest potential for misinterpretation. In this chapter I provide recommendations for how to use both quantitative and qualitative feedback to improve instruction and to evaluate faculty effectiveness.

Bias in Student EvaluationsSusan A. Basow and Julie L. Martin, Lafayette College
In this chapter, potential biasing factors in student evaluations of professors are examined. Because white male professors are the norm, faculty members who are female or who are from other racial/ethnic groups appear to be held to a higher or double standard of performance, Professor attractiveness ratings and age also affect student ratings, as do such course variables as expected grade. For example, higher expected grades are positively correlated with evaluations, even more so than actual grades. These findings should make us cautious in using student ratings as an unbiased measure of teaching effectiveness.

On-line Measures of Student Evaluation of InstructionCheryll M. Adams Ball State University
In recent years, more institutions of higher education (IHE) have moved from paper and pencil surveys to online evaluations of instruction (Avery, Bryant, Mathios, Kang, & Bell, 2006). This practice has not eliminated the controversies such as whether students can effectively evaluate an instructor’s teaching, but instead has brought new ones to the forefront. The advantages of using online evaluations include cost-effectiveness, more time for responding, and faster feedback to faculty. The trade off, in general, is a lower response rate for the evaluations. This chapter addresses research about online measures of instruction. The pros and con of using online measures of instruction instead of traditional paper and pencil measures are reviewed and recommendations are offered for using online measures of instruction effectively.

What’s the Story on Evaluations of Online Teaching?Michelle Drouin, Indiana University–Purdue University Fort Wayne
As online teaching has gained popularity in the last decade, evaluations designed specifically for online teaching have begun to emerge. In this chapter, I give an overview of some of the most popular self, peer, and student evaluations of online teaching. I also discuss the different approaches to teaching outlined by Anderson & Dron (2011) (i.e., cognitive behavioral, social-constructivist, and connectivist) and give recommendations for rubrics that align with these different pedagogical approaches.

Using Course Portfolios to Assess and Improve TeachingPaul Schafer, Elizabeth Yost Hammer, Jason Berntsen, Xavier University of Louisiana
This article describes how course portfolios can be used for both formative and summative assessments of teaching, and explains the difference between “teaching” and “course” portfolios. The article then details the successful Course Portfolio Working Group program at Xavier University of Louisiana, emphasizing the effectiveness of the program for the assessment and improvement of teaching. Practical advice is provided to assist individuals and institutions in the development of similar programs.

Peer Review of TeachingEmad A. Ismail, William Buskist, and James E. Groccia, Auburn University
This chapter describes a formative model of peer review in which faculty observe other faculty teach in order to provide constructive feedback on their teaching. We outline a five- step process for peer review that includes a preclassroom visitation meeting, classroom observation of teaching, solicitation of student feedback, preparation of a written report, and a postclassroom visitation meeting with the teacher to provide formative feedback. We also address several questions and concerns that faculty often raise about peer review of college and university teaching.

Cover design by Haley Armstrong

Feedback

Feedback regarding the editorial content of this book or any of its essays should be directed toward the individual authors or the book's editors. They (authors and editors) are solely responsible for the substance of the text.

Feedback regarding technical matters of formatting or accessibility of this text via the online environment of the Internet should be directed to the Internet Editor. If you have any complaints or difficulties in accessing these materials, be sure to provide as detailed a description of your problem(s) as you can; you should include information about the browser you are using (e.g., Firefox, Safari) and its version number well as the type of computer you are using and its operating system.

You may print multiple copies of these materials for your own personal use, including use in your classes and/or sharing with individual colleagues as long as the author's name and institution, and a notice that the materials were obtained from the website of the Society for the Teaching of Psychology (STP) <http://teachpsych.org/> appear on the copied document. For research and archival purposes, public libraries and libraries at schools, colleges, universities and similar educational institutions may print and store in their research or lending collections multiple copies of this compendium as a whole without seeking further permission of STP (the editors would appreciate receiving a pro forma notice of any such library use). No other permission is granted to you to print, copy, reproduce, or distribute additional copies of these materials. Anyone who wishes to print, copy, reproduce, or distribute copies for other purposes must obtain the permission of the individual copyright owners. Particular care should be taken to seek permission from the respective copyright holder(s) for any commercial or "for profit" use of these materials.

PsychTeacher™ and its associated graphics are trademarks of APA Division 2, Society for the Teaching of Psychology, for the distribution of educational, instructional, and other information by all means of printed, electronic and/or digital encoding, storage, retrieval, and transmission.

Suggested Reference Format

We suggest that the overall text be referenced in this fashion:
Kite, M. E. (2012). Effective evaluation of teaching: A guide for faculty and administrators. Retrieved from the Society for the Teaching of Psychology web site: http://teachpsych.org/ebooks/evals2012/index.php

Individual chapters may be referenced in this fashion, for example:
Addison, W. E., & Stowell, J. R. (2012). Conducting research on student evaluations of teaching. In M.E. Kite (Ed.), Effective evaluation of teaching: A guide for faculty and administrators. Retrieved from the Society for the Teaching of Psychology web site: http://teachpsych.org/ebooks/evals2012/index.php